arXiv AI By Matthew Nyaaba, Vida Awinime Bugri, Eric Kojo Majialuwe, Bismark Nyaaba Akanzire, Ibrahim Nantomah, Felicia Boateng, Patrick Kyeremeh, Benjamin Quarshie, Ellen Kwarteng, Macharious Nabang

Education-centered critical policy analysis of AI: Ghana's AI strategy as a case

Read the original on arXiv AI →

The article applies an Education-Centered AI Policy Framework to Ghana’s National Artificial Intelligence Strategy 2025‑2035, examining six key components such as teacher agency, curriculum, and responsible AI. It finds the strategy ambitious in promoting AI literacy, youth skills, and rural outreach, yet it falls short on school‑level implementation, teacher preparation, and culturally responsive pedagogy. The authors highlight concerns about transparency, coherence, and the need for a sector‑specific policy that links workforce readiness with classroom practice and learner protection.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

Hugging Face Trending Papers
Aug 3

Rethinking Generative AI Literacy: An Integrative, Developmental, and Dialectical Framework for K-12 Teacher Education

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has entered classrooms faster than teachers have been prepared to use it well, producing a GenAI literacy lag in which technological diffusion outpaces educators' conceptual, pedagogical, and ethical readiness. Established AI literacy frameworks predate the widespread adoption of large language models and, while acknowledging ethics, position it as a discrete competency rather than a constitutive commitment, with equity and agency as supplementary design principles.

arXiv AI
Aug 20

Global Index on Responsible AI 2026 : Conceptual Framework and Methodology

The Global Index on Responsible AI 2026 (GIRAI) 2nd Edition refines its predecessor by distinguishing between framework existence and implementation, expanding from three to five thematic areas, and adding granular variables for framework quality. It evaluates responsible AI governance across five dimensions—Inclusion and Diversity, Ethics and Sustainability, Labour and Skills, Trust and Safety, and Use of AI in Public Service—using 38 indicators organized into three pillars: AI Policy, CSO Engagement, and Enabling Conditions, plus a separate Use of Unacceptable Risk AI penalty. Data from 135 country-level researchers and secondary sources are normalized to a 100-point scale, weighted by pillar importance, and used to facilitate systematic cross‑national comparisons for policymakers, civil society, and AI developers.

By Fola Adeleke, Rachel Adams, Ayantola Alayande, Daniela Benavente, Ana Florido, Nicol\'as Grossman, Leah Junck
arXiv AI
Jul 17

Global Index on Responsible AI: 2026 Report

arXiv:2607. 14782v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Grounded in human rights-based frameworks such as the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI, the Global Index on Responsible AI (GIRAI) examines how countries translate responsible AI commitments into enforceable protections, institutional capacity, and redress mechanisms.

By Rachel Adams, Fola Adeleke, Ayantola Alayande, Selamawit Engida Abdella, Ana Florido, Nicol\'as Grossman, Leah Junck